"Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:27:59AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 21/04/2017 06:17, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> >> Thanks, this looks perfect to me, and if you're happy to put it on top
>> >> of your tree that would limit the breakage to a smaller history window,
>>
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 09:27:59AM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 21/04/2017 06:17, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> >> Thanks, this looks perfect to me, and if you're happy to put it on top
> >> of your tree that would limit the breakage to a smaller history window,
> >> so that would be ideal.
>
On 21/04/2017 06:17, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
>> Thanks, this looks perfect to me, and if you're happy to put it on top
>> of your tree that would limit the breakage to a smaller history window,
>> so that would be ideal.
>>
>> Tested-by: Michael Ellerman
> Thank you, Michael!
>
> Paolo, does th
On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 11:42:01AM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> > On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 05:28:32PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> >> On 20/04/2017 05:40, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> >> > "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> >> >
> >> > This change seems to have had the no
Paolo Bonzini writes:
> Michael, if you want to move the two srcu structs at the end of struct
> kvm, that would be fine by me. Please send a patch yourself so you can
> test it on PPC. Thanks,
Paul beat me to it :)
I've confirmed it fixes the build break and the resulting kernel can
boot a KV
"Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 05:28:32PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>> On 20/04/2017 05:40, Michael Ellerman wrote:
>> > "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
>> >
>> > This change seems to have had the non-obvious effect of breaking the
>> > powerpc KVM build.
...
>>
>> Michael, i
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 05:28:32PM +0200, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
>
>
> On 20/04/2017 05:40, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> > "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> >
> >> diff --git a/include/linux/srcutree.h b/include/linux/srcutree.h
> >> index f2b3bd6c6bc2..0400e211aa44 100644
> >> --- a/include/linux/srcutr
On 20/04/2017 05:40, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
>
>> diff --git a/include/linux/srcutree.h b/include/linux/srcutree.h
>> index f2b3bd6c6bc2..0400e211aa44 100644
>> --- a/include/linux/srcutree.h
>> +++ b/include/linux/srcutree.h
>> @@ -24,25 +24,75 @@
> ...
>> +/*
>> +
On Thu, Apr 20, 2017 at 01:40:13PM +1000, Michael Ellerman wrote:
> "Paul E. McKenney" writes:
>
> > diff --git a/include/linux/srcutree.h b/include/linux/srcutree.h
> > index f2b3bd6c6bc2..0400e211aa44 100644
> > --- a/include/linux/srcutree.h
> > +++ b/include/linux/srcutree.h
> > @@ -24,25 +24
"Paul E. McKenney" writes:
> diff --git a/include/linux/srcutree.h b/include/linux/srcutree.h
> index f2b3bd6c6bc2..0400e211aa44 100644
> --- a/include/linux/srcutree.h
> +++ b/include/linux/srcutree.h
> @@ -24,25 +24,75 @@
...
> +/*
> + * Per-SRCU-domain structure, similar in function to rcu_sta
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 09:37:10AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:50:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> > On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:40:25AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > > Peter Zijlstra proposed using SRCU to reduce mmap_sem contention [1],
> >
> > Bugger, now
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:54:20AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:40:25AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra proposed using SRCU to reduce mmap_sem contention [1],
> > however, there are workloads that could result in a high volume of
> > concurrent invocat
On Thu, Apr 13, 2017 at 11:50:29AM +0200, Peter Zijlstra wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:40:25AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> > Peter Zijlstra proposed using SRCU to reduce mmap_sem contention [1],
>
> Bugger, now you're making me feel bad for not having updated those
> patches in ages.. I
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:40:25AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra proposed using SRCU to reduce mmap_sem contention [1],
> however, there are workloads that could result in a high volume of
> concurrent invocations of call_srcu(), which with current SRCU would
> result in excessive
On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 10:40:25AM -0700, Paul E. McKenney wrote:
> Peter Zijlstra proposed using SRCU to reduce mmap_sem contention [1],
Bugger, now you're making me feel bad for not having updated those
patches in ages.. I'll try and bump it on the todo list.
Peter Zijlstra proposed using SRCU to reduce mmap_sem contention [1],
however, there are workloads that could result in a high volume of
concurrent invocations of call_srcu(), which with current SRCU would
result in excessive lock contention on the srcu_struct structure's
->queue_lock, which protec
16 matches
Mail list logo
